Scientific Hypotheses: Writing, Editing, Writing & Publishing Promoting, and Predicting Implications
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
J Korean Med Sci. 2019 Nov 25;34(45):e300 https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e300 eISSN 1598-6357·pISSN 1011-8934 Special Article Scientific Hypotheses: Writing, Editing, Writing & Publishing Promoting, and Predicting Implications Armen Yuri Gasparyan ,1 Lilit Ayvazyan ,2 Ulzhan Mukanova ,3 Marlen Yessirkepov ,4 and George D. Kitas 1,5 1Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UK 2Department of Medical Chemistry, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia 3Department of Surgical Disciplines, South Kazakhstan Medical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan. 4Department of Biology and Biochemistry, South Kazakhstan Medical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan. 5Arthritis Research UK Epidemiology Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Received: Sep 2, 2019 ABSTRACT Accepted: Oct 28, 2019 Address for Correspondence: Scientific hypotheses are essential for progress in rapidly developing academic disciplines. Armen Yuri Gasparyan, MD Proposing new ideas and hypotheses require thorough analyses of evidence-based data and Departments of Rheumatology and Research predictions of the implications. One of the main concerns relates to the ethical implications and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the of the generated hypotheses. The authors may need to outline potential benefits and University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall limitations of their suggestions and target widely visible publication outlets to ignite Hospital, Pensnett Road, Dudley, discussion by experts and start testing the hypotheses. Not many publication outlets are West Midlands DY1 2HQ, UK. currently welcoming hypotheses and unconventional ideas that may open gates to criticism E-mail: [email protected] and conservative remarks. A few scholarly journals guide the authors on how to structure © 2019 The Korean Academy of Medical hypotheses. Reflecting on general and specific issues around the subject matter is often Sciences. recommended for drafting a well-structured hypothesis article. An analysis of influential This is an Open Access article distributed hypotheses, presented in this article, particularly Strachan's hygiene hypothesis with under the terms of the Creative Commons global implications in the field of immunology and allergy, points to the need for properly Attribution Non-Commercial License (https:// interpreting and testing new suggestions. Envisaging the ethical implications of the creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial hypotheses should be considered both by authors and journal editors during the writing and use, distribution, and reproduction in any publishing process. medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Keywords: Bibliographic Databases; Peer Review; Writing; Research Ethics; Hypothesis; Impact ORCID iDs Armen Yuri Gasparyan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8749-6018 INTRODUCTION Lilit Ayvazyan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9797-4770 We live in times of digitization that radically changes scientific research, reporting, and Ulzhan Mukanova publishing strategies. Researchers all over the world are overwhelmed with processing large https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9343-2934 Marlen Yessirkepov volumes of information and searching through numerous online platforms, all of which make https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2511-6918 the whole process of scholarly analysis and synthesis complex and sophisticated. George D. Kitas https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0828-6176 Current research activities are diversifying to combine scientific observations with analysis 1 Disclosure of facts recorded by scholars from various professional backgrounds. Citation analyses and The authors have no potential conflicts of networking on social media are also becoming essential for shaping research and publishing interest to disclose. strategies globally.2 Learning specifics of increasingly interdisciplinary research studies and https://jkms.org 1/10 Scientific Hypotheses: Writing, Promoting, and Predicting Implications Author Contributions Conceptualization: Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov acquiring information facilitation skills aid researchers in formulating innovative ideas and M, Kitas GD. Methodology: Gasparyan AY, predicting developments in interrelated scientific fields. Mukanova U, Ayvazyan L. Writing - original draft: Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Yessirkepov Arguably, researchers are currently offered more opportunities than in the past for generating M. Writing - review & editing: Gasparyan AY, new ideas by performing their routine laboratory activities, observing individual cases and Yessirkepov M, Mukanova U, Kitas GD. unusual developments, and critically analyzing published scientific facts. What they need at the start of their research is to formulate a scientific hypothesis that revisits conventional theories, real-world processes, and related evidence to propose new studies and test ideas in an ethical way.3 Such a hypothesis can be of most benefit if published in an ethical journal with wide visibility and exposure to relevant online databases and promotion platforms. Although hypotheses are crucially important for the scientific progress, only few highly skilled researchers formulate and eventually publish their innovative ideas per se. Understandably, in an increasingly competitive research environment, most authors would prefer to prioritize their ideas by discussing and conducting tests in their own laboratories or clinical departments, and publishing research reports afterwards. However, there are instances when simple observations and research studies in a single center are not capable of explaining and testing new groundbreaking ideas. Formulating hypothesis articles first and calling for multicenter and interdisciplinary research can be a solution in such instances, potentially launching influential scientific directions, if not academic disciplines. The aim of this article is to overview the importance and implications of infrequently published scientific hypotheses that may open new avenues of thinking and research. DEFINITION Despite the seemingly established views on innovative ideas and hypotheses as essential research tools, no structured definition exists to tag the term and systematically track related articles. In 1973, the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) of the U.S. National Library of Medicine introduced “Research Design” as a structured keyword that referred to the importance of collecting data and properly testing hypotheses, and indirectly linked the term to ethics, methods and standards, among many other subheadings. One of the experts in the field defines “hypothesis” as a well-argued analysis of available evidence to provide a realistic (scientific) explanation of existing facts, fill gaps in public understanding of sophisticated processes, and propose a new theory or a test.4 A hypothesis can be proven wrong partially or entirely. However, even such an erroneous hypothesis may influence progress in science by initiating professional debates that help generate more realistic ideas. The main ethical requirement for hypothesis authors is to be honest about the limitations of their suggestions.5 EXAMPLES OF INFLUENTIAL SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES Daily routine in a research laboratory may lead to groundbreaking discoveries provided the daily accounts are comprehensively analyzed and reproduced by peers. The discovery of penicillin by Sir Alexander Fleming (1928) can be viewed as a prime example of such discoveries that introduced therapies to treat staphylococcal and streptococcal infections https://jkms.org https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e300 2/10 Scientific Hypotheses: Writing, Promoting, and Predicting Implications and modulate blood coagulation.6,7 Penicillin got worldwide recognition due to the inventor's seminal works published by highly prestigious and widely visible British journals, effective ‘real-world’ antibiotic therapy of pneumonia and wounds during World War II, and euphoric media coverage.8 In 1945, Fleming, Florey and Chain got a much deserved Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for the discovery that led to the mass production of the wonder drug in the U.S. and ‘real-world practice’ that tested the use of penicillin. What remained globally unnoticed is that Zinaida Yermolyeva, the outstanding Soviet microbiologist, created the Soviet penicillin, which turned out to be more effective than the Anglo-American penicillin and entered mass production in 1943; that year marked the turning of the tide of the Great Patriotic War.9 One of the reasons of the widely unnoticed discovery of Zinaida Yermolyeva is that her works were published exclusively by local Russian (Soviet) journals. The past decades have been marked by an unprecedented growth of multicenter and global research studies involving hundreds and thousands of human subjects. This trend is shaped by an increasing number of reports on clinical trials and large cohort studies that create a strong evidence base for practice recommendations. Mega-studies may help generate and test large-scale hypotheses aiming to solve health issues globally. Properly designed epidemiological studies, for example, may introduce clarity to the hygiene hypothesis that was originally proposed by David Strachan in 1989.10 David Strachan studied the epidemiology of hay fever in a cohort of 17,414 British children and concluded that declining family size and improved personal